Talkie_Toaster
I toast, therefore I am
Did that, I got a "Runtime Error!"
NitroJay's Late Start Saved Games
- Thread starter NitroJay
- Start date
Did that, I got a "Runtime Error!"
sdLeo
Cosmopolitan
Smart-ass
Yes, still, the Russians never came up with the idea of being the second Greece but the third Rome (the second one being Constantinople or New Rome).
All in all, this goes to say, it's a tough call whether they should be Greek or Roman... I myself face that dilemma everytime I play with the intent of recreating the whole Byzantine thing...
sdLeo
Cosmopolitan
you could just click on the file from the desktop or whatever folder you download stuff into, then save...
worked for me...
which save is it btw? maybe it's a prob with the save?
Talkie_Toaster
I toast, therefore I am
No, I tried it with two and still don't know what's going wrong. It's in my Warlords saves folder, but when I try to open it I just get the error.
sdLeo
Cosmopolitan
Bizarre indeed...
Talkie_Toaster
I toast, therefore I am
mhm 
Is there anything else I could POSSIBLY be doing wrong? Because if there is, chances are I am.
Is there anything else I could POSSIBLY be doing wrong? Because if there is, chances are I am.
Talkie_Toaster
I toast, therefore I am
I re-installed RFC and it worked fine 
Guess I must have mucked up the installation first time 'round.
Guess I must have mucked up the installation first time 'round.
sdLeo
Cosmopolitan
i'm glad for you
mitsho
Deity
I'm still advocating Greece, but not for historical reasons, but for gameplay purposes. Assuming the Empire can hold onto itself, but never reconquers Pompeji, Rome and Mediolanum. Then Nationalism comes around and the Greeks revolt taking the core empire of the East Roman Empire... 
If it were possible (is it?) you could just switch/change the names around. For a whole scenario (that would be a good one), one could then change the sign of the Greeks/East Romans (Call them Rum to be clear?). That would be a good scenario starting at the Begin of Middle Ages (set all European civs to the same starting date, or don't know).
Actually that brings me onto something else, multiplayer. I know it sounds crazy, but if you rebalance the game so that some civs spawn at the same time*, it could be done. Don't know though if that would be too much for most computers.
*A: Egypt, Babylon, India, China
*B: Rome, Carthage, Greece, Persia, (Japan - would probably be too far away too count)
*C: Spain, England, France, Germany, Arabia, Vikings
*D: Russia, Turkey, Mongolia
*E: Inca, Aztec
Stupid idea i know and I'll shut up now
mick
If it were possible (is it?) you could just switch/change the names around. For a whole scenario (that would be a good one), one could then change the sign of the Greeks/East Romans (Call them Rum to be clear?). That would be a good scenario starting at the Begin of Middle Ages (set all European civs to the same starting date, or don't know).
Actually that brings me onto something else, multiplayer. I know it sounds crazy, but if you rebalance the game so that some civs spawn at the same time*, it could be done. Don't know though if that would be too much for most computers.
*A: Egypt, Babylon, India, China
*B: Rome, Carthage, Greece, Persia, (Japan - would probably be too far away too count)
*C: Spain, England, France, Germany, Arabia, Vikings
*D: Russia, Turkey, Mongolia
*E: Inca, Aztec
Stupid idea i know and I'll shut up now
mick
sdLeo
Cosmopolitan
I like Mitsho's suggestion of using Greek and changing the name... but not to Roum/Rum, since that's an Arab/Turkish word...
Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire (East Rome, Byzantium) will be just fine as far as the game is concerned IMO.
Eastern Roman Empire or Byzantine Empire (East Rome, Byzantium) will be just fine as far as the game is concerned IMO.
Lord Apolon
Warlord
- Joined
- Apr 28, 2002
- Messages
- 131
So, Nitro, you asked for feedback. Here it is.
I played up until a few turns after Germany's spawn before dinner time and this is what I noticed.
First of all, as I feared (and kind of hoped
), Nova Roma is much too powerful. Honestly at first glance you can't tell that it's not the full Roman empire! (Justinian did his work well!)
Anyway these were the results. Rome gave me open borders right away so I sent my galleys into the Med. basin and saw everything.
Arabia took the initial flips but either went to war with Rome briefly and unsuccessfully or not at all. I'm guessing the former since As-Sur/Tyre/whatever was burned before I got there to see what that worthless city is called. Power graphs showed Rome as being about twice as powerful as Arabia at spawn. I will note that I sold Rome Feudalism as soon as I met them (about the time Arabia spawned) but this is before that could have an effect.
Thereafter Arabia has turtled and has four or five cities. It has not expanded into Africa despite weak defenses there.
They also converted to Christianity after the first Eurokids spawned. Persia was also Christian.
At this point Spain and Germany have slightly dented the empire but that shores up Rome's economy more than actually hurts them.
The one major blow they had is that by the time I penetrated that far, Constantinople had been seized by fierce barb stacks. This, however, made their capital... Rome.
They aren't falling anytime soon.
These are my suggestions for making them weaker:
First of all, all the western parts of the empire had just been reconquered after a lapse of a lifetime or more. They weren't deep in the Roman fold and were constantly threatened by the various barbarians. As such I could see a case for either: weakening the culture, defensive bonus, or even leaving the cities in active resistance. At the least I'd put swarms of barbs in Spain and north Italy (Are you sure they held Mediolanum in 550?). Historically these cities should fall out of Roman hands within a handful of turns.
Also, I think it was a fluke this time, but barbarian pressure on Italia should be stronger than on Constantinople itself... that didn't fall to barbarians until 1204 (the French
) and still reclaimed it after that.
But I think the most important thing is to somehow make SURE Arabia declares on Rome, and Persia also. They should probably also have a better military but I didn't see exactly what they had. Or how they did against Persia since that's inland.
On the plus side, Germany and Spain at least are both at war with Rome, and keeping it in check at least. Of course without Arabian pressure on North Africa that doesn't really matter.
Those are my observations so far. That and my perpetual one that I really don't know how to do well as the Vikings! Bah.
I played up until a few turns after Germany's spawn before dinner time and this is what I noticed.
First of all, as I feared (and kind of hoped
), Nova Roma is much too powerful. Honestly at first glance you can't tell that it's not the full Roman empire! (Justinian did his work well!) Anyway these were the results. Rome gave me open borders right away so I sent my galleys into the Med. basin and saw everything.
Arabia took the initial flips but either went to war with Rome briefly and unsuccessfully or not at all. I'm guessing the former since As-Sur/Tyre/whatever was burned before I got there to see what that worthless city is called. Power graphs showed Rome as being about twice as powerful as Arabia at spawn. I will note that I sold Rome Feudalism as soon as I met them (about the time Arabia spawned) but this is before that could have an effect.
Thereafter Arabia has turtled and has four or five cities. It has not expanded into Africa despite weak defenses there.
They also converted to Christianity after the first Eurokids spawned. Persia was also Christian.
At this point Spain and Germany have slightly dented the empire but that shores up Rome's economy more than actually hurts them.
The one major blow they had is that by the time I penetrated that far, Constantinople had been seized by fierce barb stacks. This, however, made their capital... Rome.
They aren't falling anytime soon.
These are my suggestions for making them weaker:
First of all, all the western parts of the empire had just been reconquered after a lapse of a lifetime or more. They weren't deep in the Roman fold and were constantly threatened by the various barbarians. As such I could see a case for either: weakening the culture, defensive bonus, or even leaving the cities in active resistance. At the least I'd put swarms of barbs in Spain and north Italy (Are you sure they held Mediolanum in 550?). Historically these cities should fall out of Roman hands within a handful of turns.
Also, I think it was a fluke this time, but barbarian pressure on Italia should be stronger than on Constantinople itself... that didn't fall to barbarians until 1204 (the French
) and still reclaimed it after that. But I think the most important thing is to somehow make SURE Arabia declares on Rome, and Persia also. They should probably also have a better military but I didn't see exactly what they had. Or how they did against Persia since that's inland.
On the plus side, Germany and Spain at least are both at war with Rome, and keeping it in check at least. Of course without Arabian pressure on North Africa that doesn't really matter.
Those are my observations so far. That and my perpetual one that I really don't know how to do well as the Vikings! Bah.
I tried one this weekend with a friend. Everything works well until a new civilization spawns. The code is setup to ask the player if it wants to switch. Since there are two players, the game goes OOS.
Also, you can't have players with different start times. And if you want to play a game with later civs, one person needs to start an open multi-player game, let it run, then tell the other when to jump in and take over the newly spawned civ. The client flips out if there is a player "waiting" to play.
In the new edition of Fall From Hell, in the first version they have the same issue ( I believe ) but now it is fixed. So there is an obscure way to make RFC multiplayable... o_o
Mowque
Hypermodernist
have to try it, who wants to? (our relgion demands it)
Well, we would disable the chance to flip all together. No reason to have players jumping around mid-game. Plus, that makes it too gameable. "The Aztecs are about to spawn. I'm going to disband all my units, then jump to them. Then you can take all my territory!"
The other problem I think is an SDK issue. It is easy to work around, as long as people are patient and willing to wait before jumping in (Have one player start as Spain, then slowly have other players hop in as France, England, Germany, Arabia, etc.).
The other problem I think is an SDK issue. It is easy to work around, as long as people are patient and willing to wait before jumping in (Have one player start as Spain, then slowly have other players hop in as France, England, Germany, Arabia, etc.).
Similar threads
- Sticky